On the one hand, it does show that they’re paying attention and at least have the courtesy not to take the money and run.
On the other hand, it shows that either their QA process is so far up its arse it’s crashing headfirst into its own back teeth, or their marketroids filed every memo from QA into the circular drawer. Either way it’s pretty shameful… and I’m smugly comforted in my “never preorder nuthin’” policy :).
This is why I’m generally happy to get a game for console instead of PC. Especially since I don’t have a high-end enough PC or a place to comfortably play on one. So instead I’ve got Arkham Knight on my brand-new PS4 and have actually been able to play it for three or four hours without any complaints.
I may regret getting Fallout 4 on PS4 if it has all the problems of Fallout 3 and New Vegas, and sure it’s not moddable, but I really don’t mind the interface. The ability to use my phone as an always-on PipBoy should be interesting.
Major clusterfuck on WB’s part releasing the game in the state it’s in.
For a game to be yanked from Steam it needs to be either a complete POS or hugely misrepresented (the last one I remember was some Day-Z clone which was later released under a different name and then died for the second time). Even during the Aliens: Colonial Marines debacle I don’t think the game was pulled from sale.
Lots of discussion on game forums like neogaf on this being a major vindication of Steams’ new refund policy and possible flow-on effects on game publishers.
I can’t recall ever seeing this happen before. Usually when a major company completely botches a big release, they double-down on marketing and attempt to lie through plastic grins until it blows over - and I’ve never seen any studio eat this much crow. Releasing it was poor judgment but at least this shows some spine.
Maybe EA, Ubisoft, and Activision will learn something. And then maybe Gandalf and Harry Potter will ask me to lead a team of nine magical ponies against Darth Vader and his evil sidekick Captain Planet.
Also, I want to tell everyone I completely called the Arkham Knight himself. Spoilers ahoy:
It’s Jason Todd. It was actually a poor secret if you know anything about Batman, because there’s basically only one possible guy the Arkham Knight could be. They built up that his identity was important, that he has intimate knowledge of Batman’s methods and activities, and that he has impressive skills rivaling the Dark Knight, and that he’s especially pissed at Batman. There’s only one character who fits that description. The only problem I might have with this is that they didn’t develop a new interesting character, which is too bad.
Or it shows that forcing Steam to offer refunds is dragging the developers kicking and screaming into something resembling good practice.
See, this is what I get for not following comics. I thought that it was common wisdom that the only four people that were actually dead for good in comics are Uncle Ben, the Waynes, and Jason Todd. But reading the synopsis on Wikipedia on how he comes back I want to call that a gigantic pile of bullshit (Superboy-Prime? Seriously? Followed by being cared for by Talia?) and now I wish I hadn’t looked. See, this is why I hate trying to follow comic books. Good thing I don’t really play these things for the storyline, and I wonder what we would have gotten if Paul Dini had written it.
This logic doesn’t make any sense to me. PC players are basically saying they have to suffer through what is the default gaming experience on consoles. Low, locked FPS, poor load times combined with texture/object popping, few/no graphics options, low post processing effects, etc.
On PC, getting a console-like experience is considered broken and a fiasco, but that doesn’t mean that the console versions are actually any better. It’s like expecting a $50 steak and getting McDonalds. What you’re essentially saying is “that’s why I always go to McDonalds, I can’t be disappointed if I don’t know any better”
If you’re expecting a $50 dollar steak, and keep getting McDonalds, the logical thing to do is stop going to that steakhouse, and just go to McDonalds. You’re still getting the same crap, but at least it’s cheaper.
And before you get all evangelical on me, I’m almost exclusively a PC gamer these days. But that’s because most of my favorite games are PC only. If someone’s tastes run more to the big console titles, and those titles are fairly consistently ported to PC in a gimped fashion, why would you bother investing in a gaming PC? You’re spending extra time and money to get exactly the same experience you get off the console.
Those titles aren’t typically ported to PC in a gimped fashion. Probably well under 1% of multiplatform games run better (or the same) on consoles and that’s why it’s such a kerfuffle when they do. If what happened to this Batman game is standard, why are people making such a big deal out of it?
Most complaints in this regard from PC gamers are that the game wasn’t improved enough to be suitable as a great PC game. But that doesn’t mean it’s inferior to the console version - it’s just not up to the standards/capabilities we can experience on PC. So people that say “I’m glad I have the console version, it hits my low expectations!” even when the PC version is better, just not better by enough to make people happy, is a weird stance. To expand upon our analogy, it’s more like “I ordered a nice steak and all I got was a pretty decent burger from 5 guys” vs some guy saying “I just go to McDonalds! That’s better because my expectations are low” - the 5 guys burger is still better than the McDonalds burger even if it’s not the steak it should be.
PC gaming really isn’t more expensive, anyway, when you consider the added utility of having a good PC for general purpose tasks, and the fact that you can get dozens of games on PC for every console title you buy, and that you have to pay for online functionality on consoles.
Actually, the complaints are that the PC version is broken to the point of being completely unplayable. Unlike the console versions which work just fine.
I knew there would be at least one clueless guy who would come in here just to praise the console version.
Nevermind that this generation multi-platform games have run and worked better on PC, pretty consistently, even with PC hardware that is technically INFERIOR to the PS4 (i3’s and 750ti,s are performing better than PS4 in a LOT of games).
Witcher 3 still has issues with frame rate on PS4, Lord of the fallen, still crashes on PS4, AC Unity dips into the teens on PS4, just about every multi-platform game (and 99% of games are multi-platform) perform poorly on consoles, and usually lack graphics features only found on PC. This is by far an anomaly, and yet people jump in suggestion that THIS is why they prefer consoles…
Meanwhile just about every other game performs worse on consoles… which is why I prefer gaming on PC’s ;p
I’m now wondering about the Arkham Knight trailer on youtube from Nvidia that said it was actual gameplay at 60 FPS.
Was it ever much of a mystery, though ? Apart from maybe Damian, there’s really only one Bat-character whose entire shtick is bitching that Batman sucks at being Batman and should leave the Batmanning to better, more murdery Batmen.
Well there’s R’has too I guess, but then he’s not so hung up on out-Batmanning Batman. Also he’s already been the Big Bad in Arkham City.
Let’s see. Bought Witcher 3 off GOG but haven’t played it very much, mostly because my MacBook is somewhat difficult to play such games on, even with a decent size lap desk and a mouse. Never heard of Lord of the Fallen, don’t like the AC games, and am just as likely to spend an evening playing something on my computer from the 1990s or even 1980s as I am the latest AAA title on PC or console. The best computer in my house is my 2012 MacBook Pro with a 2.5 GHz i7, a Radeon 6770M with 1 gig memory, and 16 gigs RAM. Could it run most AAA games on decent settings? Probably. Would it be better graphically or more pleasant overall than playing on a console? Maybe, especially if I am interested in mods, so I might wish I had pre-ordered Fallout 4 for PC instead. But I’m not sure a game like Arkham Knight is the kind of thing I would really prefer on PC.
Sure, gaming on PC may be objectively better, especially if one really cares about graphics and high frame rates and all of that. Historically I’ve never had the money (and now I don’t really have the interest) to worry about the upgrading treadmill of hardware to get the best performance possible, especially since a lot of AAA games are ones I’m not interested in. So I compromise. I don’t get the performance on a console, perhaps the control scheme isn’t always as good for some games, but I can just download a game or stick a disc in, sit back in my recliner a few feet from my 47" TV, and enjoy myself. Isn’t that really the point of a game?
And… these things are NOT possible on PC?
Last time I checked I preloaded Witcher 3, and yes, I do recall clicking play, and away I was playing on my 1440p monitor. Is that possible on a console? Oh no, they don’t support that resolution.
The day before that I was streaming a racing game to my TV form my PC.
Or in other words, I’m not sure what your point is, other than, yes indeed PC gaming can be better. Indeed it can be whatever you want it to be.
But I’m not sure what the relevance of that is to this thread. Specially your original post, that insinuated the reason you play on consoles is because some games come out broke on PC… but that logic is flawed, since not only does the same happen on consoles, but it happens MORE often. Have you forgotten about MCC having a broken multiplayer for months? Delay after delay on PLanetside 2, only to have the limited beta not work?
This stuff happens on ALL platforms (and on consoles, at least lately, more often than on PC), we should be focusing on the devs and publishers allowing this to happen, instead of attacking another platform in some childish attempt at lashing out.
Also… eh, this is not what I meant to type. There’s nothing wrong with praising the PS4 version. By all accounts it’s awesome, and currently the best looking version. My bad.
What I meant to say and then brain farted, was specifically coming here to put down PC and insinuate that this is a common occurrence was poor form.
Is it me or is the combat incredibly easy in this game? Or is it just the few opening scenes?
That 3 man combo opening attack is brutal, and I’ve been sloppy in combat, I remember if I ever got this sloppy in Origins or City, I’d get creamed pretty quickly. But here, sometimes I’m mashing buttons, and pwning everyone.
Might turn up the difficulty, unless in you guys estimation, the difficulty goes up after the opening areas (Ace Chemicals)?
I don’t think I did that. I said that I am generally happy to buy the console version, because I don’t really care about super-high graphics these days. In this case, I’m glad I did because it means I can play the game without having to worry about performance issues at the moment. I don’t have a system that can do better than a PS4, so I might as well take the easy road and buy for console.
If I don’t have a 1440p monitor, and don’t really see the advantage of 1440p over 1080p, then it doesn’t matter to me that the console doesn’t support it. I have the capability to stream various things right now from my computer to my TV, but the computer still doesn’t really have enough power to do something needing to use all of it. I had to look up what MCC was and then saw why I didn’t know, because I don’t have an XBox, don’t play Halo, and really don’t care about multiplayer. Same with Planetside 2 now that I’ve looked it up.
Out of idle curiosity, would you have the same reaction if the PS version was completely borked? It’s not a complete hypothetical, since that’s happened before.
If the PS version was borked, of course I’d be pissed. Hell, I somehow managed to make it all the way through the crapfest (in terms of stability) that was New Vegas on PS3. I’m not saying that the PC gamers aren’t right to be angry about a bad port. But I’ve spent enough money on objectively bad games over the years that if the game works and is fun then I’m happy.
Heck, the last $40 I spent on video games before Arkham Knight was the latest season pass pro pack for Pinball Arcade on PS3. I’m seriously considering paying $7 for a copy of Rollercoaster Tycoon 3 I can play on my Mac without having to boot into Windows. I just downloaded the Tales From the Borderlands update onto my Mac in Steam and haven’t had a chance to play it yet. On Sunday I was playing Oregon Trail online in that Apple II emulator.
I didn’t mean to start some sort of tedious console/PC war. I’m a gamer. I play what I like and I’ve been playing games since I was five (so 1987 or so). I’ve generally lost interest in how shiny the graphics are over the last decade or so.