77 réponses à ce sujet

[DavianBurke]

http://www.pcgamer.c...knight-for-pc/ 

 

 

Batman: Arkham Knight publisher Warner Bros. has announced it is suspending sales of the PC version of the game, following widespread criticism of the port. 

Here's the full statement:

We want to apologize to those of you who are experiencing performance issues with Batman: Arkham Knight on PC. We take these issues very seriously and have therefore decided to suspend future game sales of the PC version while we work to address these issues to satisfy our quality standards. We greatly value our customers and know that while there are a significant amount of players who are enjoying the game on PC, we want to do whatever we can to make the experience better for PC players overall.

Thank you to those players who have already given valuable feedback. We are continuously monitoring all threads posted in the Official Batman: Arkham Knight Community and Steam forums, as well as any issues logged with our Customer Support (support.wbgames.com). If you purchased your copy of the game and are not satisfied with your experience, then we ask for your patience while these issues are resolved. If desired, you can request a refund at help.steampowered.com (Steam refund policies can be found here: http://store.steampo...m/steam_refunds) or the retail location where you purchased the game.

The Batman: Arkham fans have continually supported the franchise to its current height of success, and we want to thank you for your patience as we work to deliver an updated version of Batman: Arkham Knight on PC so you can all enjoy the final chapter of the Batman: Arkham series as it was meant to be played.

The move follows a disastrous launch for Batman: Arkham Knight on PC. The game's 30fps cap and stuttering were only the most noticeable problems since its launch on Tuesday. PC Gamer's Chris Thursten acquired code earlier this week and published a thorough breakdown of the game's many issues. It got so bad that Green Man Gaming amended its refund policy to accommodate customers angry about the poor state of the game. 

At the time of publishing it appears you can still add Batman: Arkham Knight to your cart and progress through the checkout process on Steam, but we'll keep an eye on it.

Update: The game has since been removed from Steam, with the above statement posted on the store page. 

 

[mybudgee]

Get 'em OP

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

While I enjoy a good BioWare bash, none of their games have been remotely close to Arkham Knight bad when it comes to poor PC ports.

Possibly relevant for EA in general, they've had some shocking releases. But yeah, I don't see how you can paint BioWare with the same brush as this debacle.

[DavianBurke]

My obvious distaste with a recent BioWare game made for PC gamers by PC gamers but clearly an XBOX 360 port... the primary thing to take from this is the positive action taken by a studio that recognizes it made a serious mistake in trying to slew sub-par quality product on a platform that suffers from ports not translating over properly. 

They're fixing it. 

They aren't making excuses, they aren't saying their fans had unrealistic expectations by anticipating a game would be as good as direct out-of-mouth videos stated it would be. They're pulling it until it's fixed. I have a sneaking suspicion the entire studio also isn't going on vacation for a few weeks prior to working on the fix either. 

They owned it. 

They admitted it was a mistake, that it wasn't as good, and that my friends is integrity. 

THAT'S what EA and BioWare need to learn from this. Refusing to acknowledge issues because to do so may slow down your twitter marketing damages your reputation. Owning your mistake, apologizing, and offering to make it right earns respect. Yes, earns respect in the face of such a disastrous launch.

Sure, maybe more of that is Ubisoft and EA/BioWare setting the bar so low for gamers this past year, but whatever the reasons leading up to it... Warner Bros. just made positive play on a bad business decision. 

Learn from this.  

[In Exile]

My obvious distaste with a recent BioWare game made for PC gamers by PC gamers but clearly an XBOX 360 port... the primary thing to take from this is the positive action taken by a studio that recognizes it made a serious mistake in trying to slew sub-par quality product on a platform that suffers from ports not translating over properly. 

They're fixing it. 

They aren't making excuses, they aren't saying their fans had unrealistic expectations by anticipating a game would be as good as direct out-of-mouth videos stated it would be. They're pulling it until it's fixed. I have a sneaking suspicion the entire studio also isn't going on vacation for a few weeks prior to working on the fix either. 

They owned it. 

They admitted it was a mistake, that it wasn't as good, and that my friends is integrity. 

THAT'S what EA and BioWare need to learn from this. Refusing to acknowledge issues because to do so may slow down your twitter marketing damages your reputation. Owning your mistake, apologizing, and offering to make it right earns respect. Yes, earns respect in the face of such a disastrous launch.

Sure, maybe more of that is Ubisoft and EA/BioWare setting the bar so low for gamers this past year, but whatever the reasons leading up to it... Warner Bros. just made positive play on a bad business decision. 

Learn from this.  

 

But this is a nonsense comparison when it comes to DA:I. The game wasn't shipped comically broken out of the box. It was just like TW2: a game who had an engine that could take advantage of the graphical capacity of the PC but was designed with a console UI in mind. That's a comically far cry from a game shipping broken out of the box. 

[Dovahzeymahlkey]

But this is a nonsense comparison when it comes to DA:I. The game wasn't shipped comically broken out of the box. It was just like TW2: a game who had an engine that could take advantage of the graphical capacity of the PC but was designed with a console UI in mind. That's a comically far cry from a game shipping broken out of the box. 

this is what happens when you try to get away with understaffing a team to port your game. 10 dudes had to port this massive game to PC, those poor bastards, they got sent behind the shed. Whatever happens dont blame these heroes, they probably got ground into the dirt trying to make this work. Blame WB for not hiring enough people to help them.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

the primary thing to take from this is the positive action taken by a studio that recognizes it made a serious mistake in trying to slew sub-par quality product on a platform that suffers from ports not translating over properly.

They assigned a primarily iOS game studio of twelve people to work on the port for a graphically demanding AAA PC release. Even the Nvidia GameWorks promotional videos look like they might have been artificially sped up to bypass the fact that it leaks memory if you run it over 30 FPS.

They knew it would be an utter shitshow before releasing the game.

The only reason they're stepping back now is because the negative PR is now accompanied by the possibility for refunds. Valve forced their hand by enabling refunds (a feature that should've been there for years) and giving consumers a way to hold studios and publishers immediately accountable.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

While I enjoy a good BioWare bash, none of their games have been remotely close to Arkham Knight bad when it comes to poor PC ports.

Possibly relevant for EA in general, they've had some shocking releases. But yeah, I don't see how you can paint BioWare with the same brush as this debacle.

 

Is it OK to suggest AK to my cousin for PS4 or am I doing it wrong?

[Dermain]

They assigned a primarily iOS game studio of twelve people to work on the port for a graphically demanding AAA PC release. Even the Nvidia GameWorks promotional videos look like they might have been artificially sped up to bypass the fact that it leaks memory if you run it over 30 FPS.

They knew it would be an utter shitshow before releasing the game.

The only reason they're stepping back now is because the negative PR is now accompanied by the possibility for refunds. Valve forced their hand by enabling refunds (a feature that should've been there for years) and giving consumers a way to hold studios and publishers immediately accountable.

 

Exactly, this has absolutely nothing to do with Warner Brothers realizing that they fucked up, but it has everything to do with the fact that they're now losing money because Steam (finally) allows refunds. If anything you should be thanking Steam NOT Warner Brothers.

 

Is it OK to suggest AK to my cousin for PS4 or am I doing it wrong?

 

As far as I can tell it works perfectly on console.

[Giantdeathrobot]

The comparison doesn't hold up at all.

 

DA:I was maybe not the best optimized game on the market on release, but it did its job well enough. People with dual Titans and the like were more than able to crank up the game to absolute maximum and maintain constant 60 FPS. Even Totalbiscuit didn't have any serious problems with the port, and he's notoriously stingy when it comes to graphics and framerate. The worst thing about it was the console-ish UI, and I found that it still played more than well enough.

 

From what I've heard, Arkham Knight is borderline unplayable on PC. 30 fps cap, framerate drops, texture mishaps, massive stuttering, bugs up the whazoo, it's the AC: Unity of this year.

 

The magnitude of the issue isn't even remotely the same. Inquisition was a game that not everyone liked. Arkham Knight is a game that apparently many customers can barely even play because it's utterly broken out of the box. The only thing Bioware has to learn about this is that they shouldn't ship games in this state, and since they've never done it, well, OP can be happy,

 

And as people have said, Steam allowing refunds very probably enters the equation of why WB did such a thing in the first place. They didn't decide to be nice guys overnight. I think the game had like 30% positive reviews on Steam. That's utterly abysmal. I don't think even Colonial Marines tanked that much. They must have been bombarded with refund requests. Now they try to do this in order to staunch the fires of the controversy. Time will tell if it works, but yes, I believe we should thank Steam refunds more than anything.

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Is it OK to suggest AK to my cousin for PS4 or am I doing it wrong?

I wouldn't give WB a cent and suggest that no one else do the same.

But the PS4 version of the game is fine, so if you or your cousin want to buy the game for that, you won't have any problems.

[In Exile]

this is what happens when you try to get away with understaffing a team to port your game. 10 dudes had to port this massive game to PC, those poor bastards, they got sent behind the shed. Whatever happens dont blame these heroes, they probably got ground into the dirt trying to make this work. Blame WB for not hiring enough people to help them.

 

I'm not hating on the individual developers. I know gamers sometimes heap the hate on the developers that work to pull of the product instead of the higher ups who make the call, but that's not my style.

 

Still, it's a matter of fact the game is broken out of the box. I'm not blaming anyone, but DA:I just wasn't on that level. 

[DavianBurke]

Right, which would mean it would have been far less of an issue for the studio to apologize and make it right. We're how many patches in and the PC version is still experiencing the bulk of issues it had at launch, with the earlier patches adding several more CTD issues among many systems. 

The most recent statement from Laidlaw I saw on twitter in regards to the PC issues was to the tune of "We've done all we can on this at the moment, what we learned should hopefully make our next release better." 

Warner Bros. released a broken game and owned up, straight up, right away. BioWare released a game with broken parts and hasn't owned up to anything and then gave up. 

[DavianBurke]

And Origin also has a refund policy like Steam now has, but the issue with DA:I was many of us didn't have issues until we got to certain points of the game, or had the forced upon us patches installed, long after we were able to claim our refunds. 

I'll still give props to Warner Bros. for not backpedaling, because they could have responded in many other ways other than an apology. And they pulled the game to ensure that nobody else gets fleeced before it is fixed. 

I had no such consideration from EA. They took my money and laughed their way to the bank months before a patch finally came out that allowed my game to function enough for me to complete it so I didn't feel quite so raw on the backside. 

[In Exile]

Right, which would mean it would have been far less of an issue for the studio to apologize and make it right. We're how many patches in and the PC version is still experiencing the bulk of issues it had at launch, with the earlier patches adding several more CTD issues among many systems. 

The most recent statement from Laidlaw I saw on twitter in regards to the PC issues was to the tune of "We've done all we can on this at the moment, what we learned should hopefully make our next release better." 

Warner Bros. released a broken game and owned up, straight up, right away. BioWare released a game with broken parts and hasn't owned up to anything and then gave up. 

 

I have a few things to say. First, did you even play PC games before the last two generations of consoles? Because a stable PC release is a mystical recent invention. I grew up in the days of boot disks. I remember the hoops I had to jump through to get Wing Commander to work, and that's just how it was back then.

 

Second, DA:I was stable. Some people had crashes. I've had more with TW3 than I've ever had with DA:I. You can't use individual issues with the game as indicative of a lack of stability. Overall, the game isn't broken. 

 

WB released an actually unplayable game. DA:I released a game that didn't work well for some people, especially with older hardware. That's a huge, huge gap. It hurts gamers to even pretend the two are the same. 

[A Crusty Knight Of Colour]

Look, I've spent a significant amount of my time on the BSN either explaining in detail, or making fun of, the many foibles and mistakes of BioWare. But this comparison is just a bridge too far.

[Dermain]

Right, which would mean it would have been far less of an issue for the studio to apologize and make it right. We're how many patches in and the PC version is still experiencing the bulk of issues it had at launch, with the earlier patches adding several more CTD issues among many systems. 

The most recent statement from Laidlaw I saw on twitter in regards to the PC issues was to the tune of "We've done all we can on this at the moment, what we learned should hopefully make our next release better." 

Warner Bros. released a broken game and owned up, straight up, right away. BioWare released a game with broken parts and hasn't owned up to anything and then gave up. 

 

Because they were losing money from the refunds. That is why they did it. 

 

I was going to write some more but In Exile ninjaed my point.

[breakdown71289]

It's a good thing that I bought Arkham Knight on PS4. Haven't experienced any problems so far. 

[Dermain]

It's a good thing that I bought Arkham Knight on PS4. Haven't experienced any problems so far. 

 

Damn you console peasants getting a better experience than the PC Master Race!!!

 

THIS ISN'T SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN!!!

[DavianBurke]

I have a few things to say. First, did you even play PC games before the last two generations of consoles? Because a stable PC release is a mystical recent invention. I grew up in the days of boot disks. I remember the hoops I had to jump through to get Wing Commander to work, and that's just how it was back then.

 

Second, DA:I was stable. Some people had crashes. I've had more with TW3 than I've ever had with DA:I. You can't use individual issues with the game as indicative of a lack of stability. Overall, the game isn't broken. 

 

WB released an actually unplayable game. DA:I released a game that didn't work well for some people, especially with older hardware. That's a huge, huge gap. It hurts gamers to even pretend the two are the same. 

Funny, I've been PC gaming since 1996 and I haven't had a single PC game not work for me on purchase since... ever. I haven't played the last Assassin's Creed or this Arkham on PC though. I haven't owned a console since the PS2, Wii, and never bothered with Xbox. So every game I've played since then has been PC. 

My issue, personally, isn't with bugs or broken quests... that's what patches are for. It's with the current trend of porting console games to the PC as if you can take Middle English and plug it into a script of Arrow and understand it as smoothly as a native speaker. It's lazy, an attempt to save money (understandable except for the demonstrable issues that are more and more becoming apparent) and it doesn't work much of the time. The larger the game, the more likely a simple port won't work. 

I've not said that DAI was as bad as Arkham. I said the Warner Bros response was better. Regardless of the reasoning, it was better. They could have gone silent. They could have released a statement filled with quotes lauding the series and ending with "patches to come" but instead they all out said they messed up and will fix it. They then, in a PR move that actually makes sense, pointed out the refund option to people. Better. 

Hell, this could have been an orchestrated effort to push out a lousy PC version at next to no cost, have PC players buy it, return it for refund, and then buy it on PS4 so they don't need to wait. Drives sales up on consoles and gives them plausible reasons to decide not to develop on PC at all later. "Hey guys, we know lots of you want to play on PC but remember what happened last time? We care about you and making your experience best, so how about you get yourself a PS4 and play our game." 

Far fetched, but I'm a day dreamer. 

They owned up to their obviously terrible decision. How many companies tend to do that? It's refreshing to see. 

[In Exile]

Funny, I've been PC gaming since 1996 and I haven't had a single PC game not work for me on purchase since... ever. I haven't played the last Assassin's Creed or this Arkham on PC though. I haven't owned a console since the PS2, Wii, and never bothered with Xbox. So every game I've played since then has been PC. 

My issue, personally, isn't with bugs or broken quests... that's what patches are for. It's with the current trend of porting console games to the PC as if you can take Middle English and plug it into a script of Arrow and understand it as smoothly as a native speaker. It's lazy, an attempt to save money (understandable except for the demonstrable issues that are more and more becoming apparent) and it doesn't work much of the time. The larger the game, the more likely a simple port won't work. 

I've not said that DAI was as bad as Arkham. I said the Warner Bros response was better. Regardless of the reasoning, it was better. They could have gone silent. They could have released a statement filled with quotes lauding the series and ending with "patches to come" but instead they all out said they messed up and will fix it. They then, in a PR move that actually makes sense, pointed out the refund option to people. Better. 

Hell, this could have been an orchestrated effort to push out a lousy PC version at next to no cost, have PC players buy it, return it for refund, and then buy it on PS4 so they don't need to wait. Drives sales up on consoles and gives them plausible reasons to decide not to develop on PC at all later. "Hey guys, we know lots of you want to play on PC but remember what happened last time? We care about you and making your experience best, so how about you get yourself a PS4 and play our game." 

Far fetched, but I'm a day dreamer. 

They owned up to their obviously terrible decision. How many companies tend to do that? It's refreshing to see. 

 

The fact that you've never had an issue with a PC game somehow (apart from DA:I I guess, that's the point of your thread, right?) is unbelievable, but let's say that somehow I believe you here. 

 

The point you're making - that a console port is a broken game - is just nonsense. A broken game is one that's not actually working out of the box. As intended or otherwise. A console port's damning criticism is that the framerate might not be there, or that the UI/controls are bad. That's totally different from actually being broken.

 

The WB response isn't better. It's different, sure. It's insulting. Because they're effectively asking me to believe that at no point during the QA of this game did anyone look at the unplayable piece of **** and say, "Hey, maybe we don't release it?" But they did release this unmitigated piece of ****. And when it blew up in their face, they had the gall to say they're doing it out of some principle or respect for consumers instead of the fact that they outright tried to rob people by selling them a garbage product. 

 

That's not admirable. That's disgusting, and they don't get to wipe away the blatant stain of anti-consumer behaviour with a mea culpa because we didn't tolerate their broken, garbage product. The fact that you think this:

 

Hell, this could have been an orchestrated effort to push out a lousy PC version at next to no cost, have PC players buy it, return it for refund, and then buy it on PS4 so they don't need to wait. Drives sales up on consoles and gives them plausible reasons to decide not to develop on PC at all later. "Hey guys, we know lots of you want to play on PC but remember what happened last time? We care about you and making your experience best, so how about you get yourself a PS4 and play our game." 

 

Is somehow a good thing is just ridiculous. 

 

Bioware released a game with a lot of design flaws. They owned up to those flaws. But they didn't peddle garbage and tell me it was steak. 

[DavianBurke]

At no point have I said all console ports are broken. I said they don't translate well. It's apparent in every single one I've played that the response time when I press a key is delayed as it attempts to translate the action I performed to the console controller counterpart prior to responding. The closest I came to saying they were broken was specifically mentioning DAI as having shipped with essentially broken parts. Which, as a PC player, is accurate to my experience with the UI. I personally never had the crashes and my system ran the pretty game fine... but my character sure moved like he was drunk, his voice suddenly went from Ted Malone to Fraser Crane, and he always wore his fkn pajamas around like a middle school girl. 

It does seem though, that console ports often require PC specific patches for a variety of issues that aren't shared by the consoles. Again, doesn't mean they're broken, but certainly means they aren't whole.