• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Batman: Arkham Knight

I played through a large chunk of this game (10+ hours) and i think im nearing the end. but i got to a point where the game crashes every 3 minutes. I googled and tried some of the fixes but nothing really seems to work.

It played pretty fine, I guess after people rightfully complained, but it was smooth up to now for me 3440x1440 everything turned up on a 1080. Not sure what to do, wanted to finish the game.
 
DF-1 said:
I played through a large chunk of this game (10+ hours) and i think im nearing the end. but i got to a point where the game crashes every 3 minutes. I googled and tried some of the fixes but nothing really seems to work.

It played pretty fine, I guess after people rightfully complained, but it was smooth up to now for me 3440x1440 everything turned up on a 1080. Not sure what to do, wanted to finish the game.
Click to expand...

turn off or tweak some of the advanced graphics settings?...
 
DF-1 said:
I played through a large chunk of this game (10+ hours) and i think im nearing the end. but i got to a point where the game crashes every 3 minutes. I googled and tried some of the fixes but nothing really seems to work.

It played pretty fine, I guess after people rightfully complained, but it was smooth up to now for me 3440x1440 everything turned up on a 1080. Not sure what to do, wanted to finish the game.
Click to expand...

This is still on my backlog, think I got it for 10 dollars, sad that it still has issues :(
 
I have every Batman except the 1st which I finished on on my backlog and none of them installed.
I got like 1/10 of the way into Arkham City
 
I picked this up for pretty cheap awhile back. Played a bit with max graphics and it seemed to look and run pretty good, though I did not get very far. Will have to circle back to this someday.
 
I bought this game on sale in July 2016, in August 2016 I bought a GTX 1080 (I can't believe it has been that long). I didn't initially play the game, only installed it and played maybe 20 minutes in and let it sit. I don't remember when they released the major performance updates for this game, but I remember the performance being lackluster with the GTX 1080 back then and now I'm playing it with everything cranked, including the GameWorks stuff, and it's running great.

I've finally started seriously playing because I'm in backlog cleanup mode; I know I'm getting at least 90 FPS consistently because it's at that point that the game appears smooth to me (using a 144 Hz monitor). I think I've only disabled motion blur, I might be using FXAA if that's an option, but I'm not noticing aliasing. Also, the draw distance is very good. It looks like the major performance patches were released before I bought the game, I'm guessing that driver updates have improved upon that. I'm just very impressed with how well the game runs at this point and I can't believe it has been three years.

The Arkham games have always been demanding, but putting this one off for 2+ years seems to have been a good idea.
 
djoye said:
I bought this game on sale in July 2016, in August 2016 I bought a GTX 1080 (I can't believe it has been that long). I didn't initially play the game, only installed it and played maybe 20 minutes in and let it sit. I don't remember when they released the major performance updates for this game, but I remember the performance being lackluster with the GTX 1080 back then and now I'm playing it with everything cranked, including the GameWorks stuff, and it's running great.

I've finally started seriously playing because I'm in backlog cleanup mode; I know I'm getting at least 90 FPS consistently because it's at that point that the game appears smooth to me (using a 144 Hz monitor). I think I've only disabled motion blur, I might be using FXAA if that's an option, but I'm not noticing aliasing. Also, the draw distance is very good. It looks like the major performance patches were released before I bought the game, I'm guessing that driver updates have improved upon that. I'm just very impressed with how well the game runs at this point and I can't believe it has been three years.

The Arkham games have always been demanding, but putting this one off for 2+ years seems to have been a good idea.
Click to expand...
The game always ran great on my GTX Titan X. I was severely disappointed when they toned down the Gameworks smoke effect without giving us an option to turn it back up after the the first patch.
 
djoye said:
I bought this game on sale in July 2016, in August 2016 I bought a GTX 1080 (I can't believe it has been that long). I didn't initially play the game, only installed it and played maybe 20 minutes in and let it sit. I don't remember when they released the major performance updates for this game, but I remember the performance being lackluster with the GTX 1080 back then and now I'm playing it with everything cranked, including the GameWorks stuff, and it's running great.

I've finally started seriously playing because I'm in backlog cleanup mode; I know I'm getting at least 90 FPS consistently because it's at that point that the game appears smooth to me (using a 144 Hz monitor). I think I've only disabled motion blur, I might be using FXAA if that's an option, but I'm not noticing aliasing. Also, the draw distance is very good. It looks like the major performance patches were released before I bought the game, I'm guessing that driver updates have improved upon that. I'm just very impressed with how well the game runs at this point and I can't believe it has been three years.

The Arkham games have always been demanding, but putting this one off for 2+ years seems to have been a good idea.
Click to expand...

As you found out, there are often benefits to being in a perpetual state of backlog, lol.

1) Bugs in new releases get worked out while you're catching up on older titles
2) The game gets much cheaper
3) Old games tend to run better on current hardware (great for those who cringe at the price of upper-tier GPU prices)
4) Often, you can pick up the game + season pass/DLCs/GOTY edition for the complete experience

Now for MP games things are obviously different, since the community numbers are typically stronger at first and then dwindle off as people move on to the next new flavor of the month/year.

But for me... "Don't need to worry about the multiplayer community when you don't play multiplayer games" :LOL:

BlackGuyThinking.jpg
 
what happened to Rocksteady??...Arkham Knight came out in 2015!...they became one of my favorite developers after the amazing Arkham series and then they just dropped off...there have been rumors of a new Superman game or even another Batman but E3 is almost over and still nothing from them...
 
polonyc2 said:
what happened to Rocksteady??...Arkham Knight came out in 2015!...they became one of my favorite developers after the amazing Arkham series and then they just dropped off...there have been rumors of a new Superman game or even another Batman but E3 is almost over and still nothing from them...
Click to expand...
Sefton Hill said they were working on a new game back in 2016. It takes a while to develop new IP, so maybe they're just not ready to show anything yet. The rumor that they were working on a Superman game was debunked. I think their Batman series has run its course. I'm sure Rocksteady doesn't want to be solely known for making Batman games, let alone superhero games.
 
I finally picked up the Season of Infamy DLC...it's part of Steam's Mid-Week sale ($2.49)...I hear it's the best DLC in the game...I enjoyed all the Arkham games a lot...I need to do a playthrough of all 3 games again soon with my 1440p monitor
 
Digital Foundry: Arkham Knight PC revisited- can today's best hardware deliver 4K at 60fps?

what's clear from running the PC game at higher resolutions is that Rocksteady's original assets not only hold up at 4K, they look absolutely beautiful...while some of the core effects like depth of field or the game's signature rain don't scale to higher pixel-counts so effectively, the high frequency detail, the stunning character modelling and the sheer atmosphere of Rocksteady's open world Gotham is simply phenomenal when pushed to the next level

With a 4K60 resolution/performance target in mind, GeForce is the only game in town...GTX 1080 Ti is fine for the most part, but sits on an uncomfortable threshold where the double-buffer v-sync can still bring frame-rates crashing down in cutscenes and heavier gameplay scenes...RTX 2080 improves matter by a small but noticeable degree, but it's the top-tier RTX 2080 Ti paired with the i7 8700K that gives us a nigh-on locked 60fps at a beautiful ultra HD pixel-count...

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-return-to-arkham-knight-pc-at-4k60
 
Did I miss something? I had this game on Steam a while back, but I just checked it and I have all the DLC added to my game. Was there a free giveaway or something I missed?
 
kirbyrj said:
Did I miss something? I had this game on Steam a while back, but I just checked it and I have all the DLC added to my game. Was there a free giveaway or something I missed?
Click to expand...
Well, there was a lot of negative feedback about the quality of the PC port initially. The developers or publisher (not sure which) offered incentives and in some cases refunds as an apology. Had not heard about free DLC but it is of course possible. And actually by most accounts the game got much, much better with patches. No personal experience with it here as I have the PS4 version.
 
kirbyrj said:
Did I miss something? I had this game on Steam a while back, but I just checked it and I have all the DLC added to my game. Was there a free giveaway or something I missed?
Click to expand...

biggles said:
Well, there was a lot of negative feedback about the quality of the PC port initially. The developers or publisher (not sure which) offered incentives and in some cases refunds as an apology. Had not heard about free DLC but it is of course possible. And actually by most accounts the game got much, much better with patches. No personal experience with it here as I have the PS4 version.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The game really did get a lot better. Aside from SLI not working worth a fuck, its in pretty good shape now.
 
I'll have to reinstall it and try it again. I figure at this point why not since I have free DLC. Although it will probably wait until after Assassin's Creed Odyssey.
 
kirbyrj said:
I'll have to reinstall it and try it again. I figure at this point why not since I have free DLC. Although it will probably wait until after Assassin's Creed Odyssey.
Click to expand...

You really should. The whole PC release debacle aside, this really is a fucking outstanding game! Depending on the mood I'm in, I sometimes like it better than Arkham City and I consider that to literally be an absolute masterpiece and a nearly perfect game. Maybe it's because I'm a YUGE Batman fan and these games (even Origins) are the best Batman adaptations I think ever IMO, well tied with Miller's Dark Knight. Rocksteady really captured what Batman has always been in my mind.
 
MacLeod said:
You really should. The whole PC release debacle aside, this really is a fucking outstanding game! Depending on the mood I'm in, I sometimes like it better than Arkham City and I consider that to literally be an absolute masterpiece and a nearly perfect game. Maybe it's because I'm a YUGE Batman fan and these games (even Origins) are the best Batman adaptations I think ever IMO, well tied with Miller's Dark Knight. Rocksteady really captured what Batman has always been in my mind.
Click to expand...

I've played through Arkham Asylum and City twice each. Origins once and Arkham Knight once. I also liked Shadow of Mordor, but didn't care for Mad Max. I never really had too much problem with the PC port of the game upon release. It wasn't perfect, but it wasn't so distracting that I couldn't play it. Logged maybe 50 hours completing it to 100%.
 
MacLeod said:
You really should. The whole PC release debacle aside, this really is a fucking outstanding game! Depending on the mood I'm in, I sometimes like it better than Arkham City and I consider that to literally be an absolute masterpiece and a nearly perfect game. Maybe it's because I'm a YUGE Batman fan and these games (even Origins) are the best Batman adaptations I think ever IMO, well tied with Miller's Dark Knight. Rocksteady really captured what Batman has always been in my mind.
Click to expand...

While I think the game has some serious problems (over reliance on the Bat Tank, how poorly they handle the "mystery" of the Arkham Knight) it does an absolutely outstanding job of closing out that world. The final story bits for some of those characters were just, wow and the story itself has possibly some of the best moments in the series. I still think Knight is the weakest of the series, but it is still a good game.
 
MacLeod said:
You really should. The whole PC release debacle aside, this really is a fucking outstanding game! Depending on the mood I'm in, I sometimes like it better than Arkham City and I consider that to literally be an absolute masterpiece and a nearly perfect game. Maybe it's because I'm a YUGE Batman fan and these games (even Origins) are the best Batman adaptations I think ever IMO, well tied with Miller's Dark Knight. Rocksteady really captured what Batman has always been in my mind.
Click to expand...

the guys at Rocksteady really know their Batman mythology and history and it really shows in the trilogy...the games do an outstanding job of bringing the comics to life...the 3 Arkham games (and even Origins) are one of my all time favorite gaming series
 
polonyc2 said:
the guys at Rocksteady really know their Batman mythology and history and it really shows in the trilogy...the games do an outstanding job of bringing the comics to life...the 3 Arkham games (and even Origins) are one of my all time favorite gaming series
Click to expand...

Rocksteady's love of the Batman mythos and how seriously they took the stories in the games really make me hope the rumors of them doing a Superman game are real. Though, I do hope it's not a super grim-dark game. I'd love to see them take a crack at a "brighter" more hopeful world.
 
polonyc2 said:
Digital Foundry: Arkham Knight PC revisited- can today's best hardware deliver 4K at 60fps?

what's clear from running the PC game at higher resolutions is that Rocksteady's original assets not only hold up at 4K, they look absolutely beautiful...while some of the core effects like depth of field or the game's signature rain don't scale to higher pixel-counts so effectively, the high frequency detail, the stunning character modelling and the sheer atmosphere of Rocksteady's open world Gotham is simply phenomenal when pushed to the next level

With a 4K60 resolution/performance target in mind, GeForce is the only game in town...GTX 1080 Ti is fine for the most part, but sits on an uncomfortable threshold where the double-buffer v-sync can still bring frame-rates crashing down in cutscenes and heavier gameplay scenes...RTX 2080 improves matter by a small but noticeable degree, but it's the top-tier RTX 2080 Ti paired with the i7 8700K that gives us a nigh-on locked 60fps at a beautiful ultra HD pixel-count...

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2018-return-to-arkham-knight-pc-at-4k60
Click to expand...

makes me want to replay the trilogy...I never played it on my 1440p G-Sync monitor so it should look even more amazing...I should try them at 4K using Nvidia DSR...plus I never played the Season of Infamy Arkham Knight DLC which I hear is excellent and I recently picked up during a Steam sale
 
Ripskin said:
This is still on my backlog, think I got it for 10 dollars, sad that it still has issues :(
Click to expand...

Same here. Got it dirt cheap, but other than powering it up for a peak I haven't done anything with it.

I have dozens of games on my Steam account like that LOL
 
Q-BZ said:
This is a great game and an overall great series.
Click to expand...

I have now finished Arkham Asylum and Arkham City due to the positive input from the [H] community, and I just don't get it. I find both games extremely boring, along with Mad Max and Shadow of Mordor.
 
braamer said:
I have now finished Arkham Asylum and Arkham City due to the positive input from the [H] community, and I just don't get it. I find both games extremely boring, along with Mad Max and Shadow of Mordor.
Click to expand...
What about the Batman games was boring? I understand the feeling with Mad Max and Shadow of Mordor, as boiling it down they are both your standard run-of-the-mill open world games stuffed with padding, but I never felt like anything in the Batman games was done without purpose.
 
Armenius said:
What about the Batman games was boring? I understand the feeling with Mad Max and Shadow of Mordor, as boiling it down they are both your standard run-of-the-mill open world games stuffed with padding, but I never felt like anything in the Batman games was done without purpose.
Click to expand...

I find the settings boring and unattractive, and I really do not like the combat. The games are very repetitive, which is why I also don't like Mad Max and Shadow of Mordor.
 
Yeah, some people just don't like the combat. I can see where it's repetitive and not very deep, but it's satisfying enough for me and I found a lot of other things to like about the games. I haven't played Mordor but I thoroughly enjoyed all of the Batman games and Mad Max. Sounds like that style of game just doesn't work for you, which is okay. At least you tried them!
 
A lot of people still decry the Arkham series' combat mechanics, often by pointing out that video of the guy spamming the punch and counter buttons. What they overlook is how that's just the beginning combat with enemies who have no special defenses or abilities. Later in the game if you just spam punch and counter, you will get your ass handed to you in about 10 seconds. It quickly turns into a challenge when you have to remember which enemy needs what weapon or defense, keep track of where each enemy is and their "state", etc. It gets even more difficult when you play on hard without the counter icons.
 
Colonel Sanders said:
A lot of people still decry the Arkham series' combat mechanics, often by pointing out that video of the guy spamming the punch and counter buttons. What they overlook is how that's just the beginning combat with enemies who have no special defenses or abilities. Later in the game if you just spam punch and counter, you will get your ass handed to you in about 10 seconds. It quickly turns into a challenge when you have to remember which enemy needs what weapon or defense, keep track of where each enemy is and their "state", etc. It gets even more difficult when you play on hard without the counter icons.
Click to expand...

Well, I consider "flawless" combat the goal of every encounter. That itself makes it more than just "spamming." You can't spam and expect to have a flawless encounter. I generally prefer to play it as a stealth game. However, the combat doesn't really bother me. Not every combat engine needs to be DMC, Bayonetta, or Nier....or just any old Platinum game. Batman should be quick and to the point.

My main issue with the games and it's in the sequels is the lack of narrative focus. Arkham City is so busy that it becomes hard to keep track of the momentum of the narrative. This wasn't an issue with the simpler Asylum. That game is the perfect transition of the Metroid format to 3D. I never completed any of the sequels due to this lack of "focus." I understand this is in the nature of its "open world' but I really feel Asylum got it right. Asylum was incredibly focused.
 
Colonel Sanders said:
A lot of people still decry the Arkham series' combat mechanics, often by pointing out that video of the guy spamming the punch and counter buttons. What they overlook is how that's just the beginning combat with enemies who have no special defenses or abilities. Later in the game if you just spam punch and counter, you will get your ass handed to you in about 10 seconds. It quickly turns into a challenge when you have to remember which enemy needs what weapon or defense, keep track of where each enemy is and their "state", etc. It gets even more difficult when you play on hard without the counter icons.
Click to expand...
Yes, there is a wonderful progression of difficulty with the combat mechanics. Also have to remember in Asylum there could only be up to 2 enemies attacking you at once, which was bumped up to 3 in City, and finally 7 (!) in Knight. The combat in Knight was really frenetic in a good way because of that.
twonunpackmule said:
Well, I consider "flawless" combat the goal of every encounter. That itself makes it more than just "spamming." You can't spam and expect to have a flawless encounter. I generally prefer to play it as a stealth game. However, the combat doesn't really bother me. Not every combat engine needs to be DMC, Bayonetta, or Nier....or just any old Platinum game. Batman should be quick and to the point.

My main issue with the games and it's in the sequels is the lack of narrative focus. Arkham City is so busy that it becomes hard to keep track of the momentum of the narrative. This wasn't an issue with the simpler Asylum. That game is the perfect transition of the Metroid format to 3D. I never completed any of the sequels due to this lack of "focus." I understand this is in the nature of its "open world' but I really feel Asylum got it right. Asylum was incredibly focused.
Click to expand...
Agree to the first point, disagree with the second. The main narrative was still very focused in the later games, but transitioning to more of an open world naturally had to create more distractions to fill it. City admittedly didn't do a good job of fitting the side missions in with the main story, but they improved that integration with Knight. The most important part is the world still reacted to your progress, making everything feel purposeful.
 
Armenius said:
Agree to the first point, disagree with the second. The main narrative was still very focused in the later games, but transitioning to more of an open world naturally had to create more distractions to fill it. City admittedly didn't do a good job of fitting the side missions in with the main story, but they improved that integration with Knight. The most important part is the world still reacted to your progress, making everything feel purposeful.
Click to expand...

And, I would disagree even more so. I do think Knight did a better job than the sloppy City. However, it's still "open world" and that immediately means a lack of forward drive. Especially as the game gets further along. I do think Knight does a great job of directing you to a certain point. However, once you do the "blimp" part, I feel the game just sort of loses track.

I just loaded up an old save of City, and I have absolutely no idea what I'm doing. So, I have to now restart it for the 4th time.
 
twonunpackmule said:
And, I would disagree even more so. I do think Knight did a better job than the sloppy City. However, it's still "open world" and that immediately means a lack of forward drive. Especially as the game gets further along. I do think Knight does a great job of directing you to a certain point. However, once you do the "blimp" part, I feel the game just sort of loses track.
Click to expand...
It's a balancing act. You want to give players a certain amount of freedom, but players like myself who are completionist easily get distracted by everything else. Asylum handled this well by locking things off with needed gadgets in a very progressive way, but I agree they lost sight of this when transitioning to a more open world. On the flip side you have Far Cry 5, which forces story progression on the player after a certain amount of time has passed, completely eliminating player freedom. Which is the better way of handling things from a gameplay perspective? In my experience people are annoyed by the latter.
 
I really enjoyed the combat in all of the Arkham games. It's easy to mash like mad early in the games, but that's not going to work later on. It's also not going to net you any XP or unlocks either. It's designed to be approachable and easy to learn by challenging to master. Hitting those really huge combos and not taking damage isn't easy. Especially once you start encountering enemies that have different weapons and powers.

As far as the series goes, I still think the first one is the best. The open world concept is nice, but the pacing is off as a result. It feels like Batman is just cruising around wasting time during a supposed crisis. I like being able to do things at my own pace, but it totally sacrifices any urgency the game is attempting to create. That's kinda most games, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top