370°

Warner Bros is Really Pi**ing Me Off With This Pre Order Arkham Knight S**t

God Damn it, MORE dlc for Arkham Knight. You suck Warner

Read Full Story >>
1080players.com
Palitera3256d ago (Edited 3256d ago )

It's never a bonus. It is simply ripped content.

Psychotica3256d ago

I doubt it's ripped. If anything they put hooks in the main code to add additional content.

XBLSkull3256d ago (Edited 3256d ago )

Quoted from article:

"plan on picking it up day 1. Pre-order though? No f'n way."

"I'll still buy the game but in no way am I shelling out one cent for dlc. Nope. Not happening"

So... instead of paying $60 for the DLC, you are going to pay $60 for it without the DLC? Wise choice bro, wise choice.

DragonKnight3256d ago

@XBLSkull: He's an idiot. He has this much of a problem with it but is still going to buy the game. That's pretty much still giving WB a pass on their practices. If he was that pissed, he'd boycott the game under principle.

Ninver3256d ago

Anyone who defends this practices other works for said company or simply loves being shafted. Nothing about dlc is positive unless it's free.

thekhurg3255d ago

I'll play the game in a year or two when all of the cut content is added in as a "game of the year" package for a reasonable price. This style of in your face DLC thumping has got to stop.

BeefCurtains3255d ago

Welcome to the next generation of gaming. Pay for the game, and then pay again for the complete game.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3255d ago
Sharingan_no_Kakashi3256d ago

Okay, calm down... it'll be okay lol.

trickman8883256d ago

This isn't a response to you, but to the article:

What the hell is this? Youtube?!

These stupid idiotic Article Titles need to get the **** out of N4G.No point in even visiting the site, if the title+short description make you look like a whining child.

Peace_Love_and_FPS3256d ago

Eh, I want an author who's passionate about gaming. Also, statistical fact that those who swear are more trustworthy ;)

dcj05243256d ago

I don't get it. If you don't like DLC don't buy it. Not hard.

Summons753256d ago

and get the content that should have been in the game forever locked away...

Transporter473256d ago

Why not wait for a GOTY edition that always comes out?

M1ST4K33256d ago (Edited 3256d ago )

@transporter47, Because this behaviour from companies should not be supported.

After Witcher 3 and CDRP attitude towards free DLC, no pre-order bonuses / micro-transations, I think many people changed their point of view (finally) towards those money ripping strats.

I will, indeed wait for a GOTY of the game because I'm willing to pay 60$ for a full game AFTER reviews, so I'm sure it won't be a flop. Money is hard to earn, at least for me.

_-EDMIX-_3256d ago

No bro, anything they give should be free, sequels, prequels, their house, car etc.

If they made it, we have the RIGHT TO TAKE IT FREE OF CHARGE!

Yahdaree3256d ago

This is some solid sarcasm... I like it.

Griever3256d ago (Edited 3256d ago )

People are already paying for the game in full $60. When somebody pays the full price, they deserve the full game. How the hell is it justifiable that you will only receive a certain content IF you preorder? The content is ready on day one and it is a part of the game so why do you need to preorder to access it? That is just extortion. Furthermore, why is certain content limited to certain stores? It is ready and part of the game so why is it being sold to stores instead being included in the game and being sold to you for the full $60 you are paying?

I agree that developers/publishers have to make money but there are ethical/fair and unethical/greedy means of making money. Batman Arkham Knight is probably the worst abuse of DLC with playable characters, game modes, story, weapons, costumes and skins locked behind pay wall. How can anybody justify this unless they started gaming just last gen and saw DLC as a normal part of life??

_-EDMIX-_3256d ago (Edited 3256d ago )

"s the full price, they deserve the full game"...thats the thing.

This game is 5x larger then City and its already in a new engine, how do you know what the "full" game is?

Could it not be that its an extra?

and fyi, with inflation games actually cost less, not more.

http://www.ign.com/articles...

I know nothing of the "content" being on the game, I'm pretty sure you download the extras and if anything, the assets are already clearly on the engine and they are just giving you the code to actually auto create said content, simlar to how mods are made.

Having the assets to make and giving content are not the same thing. You can have the Skyrim engine, doesn't mean you own the mods. I've gotten many mods at are mere mb, but in game are in gigs as your downloading the code to said content for the game. Thus...you have the assets, you don't have the content in which those assets are made up of.

"content limited to certain stores" business bud, get use to it, you don't own the IP, want all the extras, BUY THEM!

That is like saying "man, why is the Big Mac on sale in Ohio" lol. You don't own the company, have not rights over the IP or the content they create.

Abuse? Last time I checked...your buying this by CHOICE NOT by RIGHT. All the extra content they make is up to them how they want to actually disperse.

Your not owned EVERYTHING THEY MAKE, they are not making a smaller game, in fact they are not making a lessor game in any regard.

Soooo why is it even when they are giving you MORE by default, oh...your owed MORE? I feel if you never heard of the extras, you wouldn't be saying this. It sounds like crying and whining because you hear they are making extras...yet disregard the game is again by default already greater then any of their other entries.

Even if they put this in the game and never stated it...then released some OTHER DLC, you would still be crying that your "owed it". Face it, your mad because they are adding more at a price, yet your disregarding that the base game is already larger then any other of their games.

Sounds like your just salty about hearing your not getting something and others are. You get what you pay for.

To hear crying even when MORE is offered in the base game merely means your just want them to work for FREE while you pay nothing for extra content. Thats not how life or business works bud. Even CDPR are charging for some of their DLC.

You are owed nothing but a working game. "full" sounds a bit subjective to me bud, anyone can claim "yo bro, the full is really 50 maps bro" never mind the series shows no evidence of ever planning to launch with such a thing. They need to charge as its EXTRA, thy worked EXTRA to make it, they need to get paid.

@Griever-"It is not that simple! Rampant DLC and microtransactions mean incomplete games, lesser content"

??? Not really. because Smash, Mario Kart, BF and Witcher 3 where suppose to have MORE? Despite them already having MORE as base games? Sooo how do you know the DLC was from the main game?

Is it not feasible that the content was made to NEVER be in the main game? Could it not be that they could only budget and create the content if it was only sold as extra and not put in the base game?

they don't work for free, why should they include such a thing AT THE SAME BASE PAY when that pay is actually LESSOR?

Griever3256d ago (Edited 3256d ago )

@EDMIX

I am "salty" and "crying?" Did I insult your mom or something because you are really taking this personally. We are debating on a topic about a business practice and you resort to petty attacks, belittlement and insults. Are you some teenage brat or a poorly educated trash? After reading your whole incoherent and poorly written rant I get the gist of it. Basically, you are saying that businesses can do whatever they want and if you do not like it, don't buy it. Right?

You do not protest when a retailer hikes prices to unreasonable levels? Restaurant meal order takes too long to arrive? Government raises taxes? Your flight is late for hours? Your new TV does not includes a controller or power cord? Your new smartphone is dead on arrival and you do not get a replacement? Your goods are damaged or lost in transit by the carrier? Do you really like to lie down and take it quietly as you bite the pillow? Sorry but I dont and that just means being aware of your rights as a consumer and not "crying." I have been playing games since the 80s and I see DLC the way it is and not as some universal fact. If you do not realize that you are being abused and exploited then nobody can help you.

mkis0073256d ago

+1 to EDMIX

I would like to add the preordering doesn't even cost a penny.

Also I like your points about "what is a full game". We don't even know! They could have cut /scraped a ton of content that wouldn't work...is it no longer a full game?

Skins in my opinion are extras...except for the base skin they are not required to make batman batman. Rather than increase the base price of the game for these things not everyone needs, they give us the option.

LamerTamer3256d ago (Edited 3256d ago )

@ mkis007

Preordering doesn't cost anything because it is a BIG benefit to publishers. They get your money up front for a game that might suck or be so riddled with bugs as to be unplayable. Then they place a review embargo on the game so by the time you hear it sucks you own it. It is even worse for digital buyers because they can't sell or return to the store the piece of crap game.

Pre-ordering is almost a scam.

3256d ago
+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 3256d ago
Griever3256d ago (Edited 3256d ago )

THIS attitude is what has gotten us to where we are today. It is not that simple! Rampant DLC and microtransactions mean incomplete games, lesser content, fewer unlockables and lesser replay value. Prior to the age of the DLC games had tonnes of unlockable costumes, guns, modes, secrets etc. that gave the game significant replay value. Today if you do not buy DLC, you get a half-assed game that can barely hold you for a few days. People who hate DLC see that their beloved games are being butchered and sold in bite-sized pieces to make extra money.

Keeping quite and just not buying those DLC will not make much of a difference because the developer/publisher has already sold the game for a full price and are not losing anything if you do not buy their DLC. However, speaking up, objecting and protesting does makes a difference.

@MysticStrummer

Do you want me to write a full university level essay here? This is a comment section! If you think I generalized and oversimplified then please enlighten me with your deeper insight in to the issue.

MysticStrummer3256d ago

"It is not that simple! (goes on to oversimplify and generalize like it's going out of style)"

dcj05243256d ago

EA's number one profit revenue came from micro transactions and people have been giving them heel for it for years. So obviously that's not working. Don't buy it then they'll see it's something we don't want.

gangsta_red3255d ago (Edited 3255d ago )

"Prior to the age of the DLC games had tonnes of unlockable costumes, guns, modes, secrets etc. that gave the game significant replay value."

You are seriously letting nostalgia cloud your point of views.

I don't know what past reality you were in but today's games are bigger, more expensive to develop and more advanced in every way and have way more replay value than the older games from the 80's ever did.

Which older game exactly had "tons" of unlockable costumes, modes and secrets? What exactly is so incomplete about some of these games that offer DLC, so far i have completed numerous games without buying any DLC.

I think that is what Mystic and others are bringing to your attention. I mean with a Master's degree I'm sure you could be a little more clear when discussing this right?

"Keeping quite and just not buying those DLC will not make much of a difference..."

Yes it does, it does more than whining on some forum site. If you buy the game but don't spend a penny on the OPTIONAL DLC then that sends a message that Joe Consumer is not interested in paying extra for content. Clearly that sends a stronger message than screaming and hollering on how video games used to be on N4G.

I'm no fan of DLC or microtransactions but I definitely don't agree with your reasons.

Eonjay3256d ago

Exactly. in fact if people don't like it they would just stop buying it and it would go away. Prepubescent meltdowns achieve nothing.

spicelicka3256d ago

Prepubescent logic doesn't achieve anything either. If you really think the "stop buying" tactic works that easily, you're clearly ignorant and the reason why the industry has gotten so exploitative.

Eonjay3256d ago

@spicelicka

Money speaks louder than words. You speak with your wallet.

spicelicka3256d ago

HEY how about if you don't like people complaining about something that can only benefit us as gamers, then don't comment. Not hard.

Eonjay3256d ago

Its really simple, everyone has an opinion. And, everyone is allowed to give their point of view.

Halo2ODST23256d ago

You see to be complaining... here was I thinking you a halo fanboy could never be negative.

Halo2ODST23256d ago

We like dlc , just not bull$hit like this.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 3255d ago
NinjaRichParty3256d ago

Why don't we just take a breath. Being angry on the internet won't help. Just vote with your wallet, brother. :)

pompombrum3256d ago

Who said being angry on the internet won't help? Don Mattrick might disagree with you there.. as he looks up into the clouds day dreaming what it would be like to be in a relevant position again.

Skate-AK3256d ago

I doubt he could care less. Dude is loaded. I know it wouldn't bother me what people on the Internet said.

NinjaRichParty3255d ago

Hahahaha. Mattrick is a millionaire. He doesn't care one bit about "being relevant".

spicelicka3256d ago

It's not that simple, if people weren't angry over the internet we would still have Xbox one with kinect required, DRM, and Console locked games. And if the system didn't sell after the whole xbox brand would be in limbo.

Not only did the internet outcry change the policies in favor of gamers, it saved xbox from potential death.

Joe9133256d ago

People knew and voiced their dislike for their policies for like 6 months when it was just a rumor but did MS change because of the out cry nope they seen people vote with their wallets before changing anything.

NinjaRichParty3255d ago

Nope. People voted with their wallets in the form of not preordering right away. MS saw the numbers and knew something had to change.

Show all comments (88)
120°

6 Games That Genuinely Deserve A Current-Gen Upgrade

Games such as Mad Max, Red Dead Redemption 2, and Batman: Arkham Knight desperately deserve a modern-day revisit.

thorstein8d ago

Mad Max is underrated. Such a fun game.

Cacabunga7d ago (Edited 7d ago )

RDR2 still looks astounding on PS4 Pro. i cannot imagine how it could look with a next gen upgrade.

JonTheGod7d ago (Edited 7d ago )

Probably not very different.

No idea why this article is highlighting recent beautiful graphically-advanced games and saying they need current gen makeovers. They already look better than most new releases; just compare Arkham Knight and Suicide Squad!

Yi-Long7d ago

It's obviously never gonna happen since Sony killed the game and studio, but Driveclub. Even in its current state, 10 years after release, it still puts many competitors to shame ...

Demetrius7d ago

I'm not into racing games but yeah I even looked at gameplay of that sometimes

Demetrius7d ago

Mad max ikr! Far cry primal, it amuses me how ubisoft just left ac unity hanging, sadly most of the good staff left from rocksteady while being forced to make that abomination smh

160°

15 Single Player Games That Divided Fans

One way or another, these games provoked strong reactions.

Read Full Story >>
gamingbolt.com
banger8813d ago

I don't think Days Gone divided fans. For the most part, gamers loved it. It was the reviewers who were divided. Self-loathing racist pieces of shit that took exception to the main character being white. This was a fantastic game, one of the best open-world games I ever played, and I've played them all.

Cacabunga13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

Second you on this.. I had absolute blast playing this game!! Memorable!

TLOU 2 I thought was utter s***.. I still haven’t finished it and stopped about halfway (apparently).

It wasn’t fans divided around The Order, it was a period where xbox fanboys were thinking Rise was a more engaging game so they were spreading a lot of hate..
Today they are hibernating with nothing to play
The Order was short, no denying, but a great game with huge potential

shinoff218313d ago

I enjoyed days gone and last of us 2. PeoPke trippin.

I always thought the order was kinda whack seeming so I never tried it. Id like to now though.

Jon6158613d ago

No thr order was a short, clunky mediocre yet visually stunning game. I thoughts so and pretty much every other reviewer did too.

thorstein13d ago

The Order, where length was a criterion for rating a game, but only this particular game and no others.

Demetrius13d ago

I agree on my 2nd playthrough, ps5 this time

RavenWolfx13d ago

While I enjoy what is there in Days Gone, I mourn what was lost. The first trailers for Days Gone showed a morality system that looked interesting. For example, in the beginning when you are chasing down Leon and after you caught him, you could choose to shoot him or leave him for the freaks. You can see hints of it in other places, like if you catch a bandit unaware sometimes they will disarm and it seems like Deacon had the option to shoot them or let them go (he automatically lets them go).

Crows9012d ago

Whatever...those systems unless revolutionary don't add much...they rarely do in games that do have them.

anast13d ago

For the most part, when it comes to Last of Us 2, incels, homophobes, and closet national socialist types didn't like it. I repeat not all, but most.

Days Gone is a great game and it was attacked by the leftist socialist people that are actually closet fascists. As a great poet once said: "Socialism is the mother of fascism."

The Order got hit from anti-Sony Xbox fans.

Out of these 3, Last of Us 2 stands above as being a work of art. It's still generating a ton conversation to this day.

coolbeans13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

-"Last of Us 2, incels, homophobes, and closet national socialist types didn't like it. I repeat not all, but most."

It's so weird & cringe to see other gamers paint this broad brush of *who* didn't like Part II. Why take the "most who disagree with me are Hitler" type of mentality over game tastes?

-"The Order got hit from anti-Sony Xbox fans."

No other community I've dabbled in - be it social media or gaming forums - has built up such a dedicated defense for The Order like N4G. This attitude fundamentally blows my mind, especially in the face of similar older titles (hello Uncharted 1) that already did a marginally better job at storytelling and gameplay. It almost feels like some N4G group chat made this reflexive defense as a meme and a bunch of posters are still playing along with it. No offense to genuine Order fans, but I simply can't shake that feeling.

Yui_Suzumiya13d ago

Well to be fair, I remember being only one of a few people on this site that actually praised The Order when it for came out and got alot of flack for it. Over time it seems opinions have changed about it.

anast13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

saying something is "cringe" doesn't prove me wrong. You just throw words out and hope they stick. Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise.

I got:

Letizi, R., & Norman, C. (2023). “You Took That From Me”: Conspiracism and Online Harassment in the Alt-Fandom of The Last of Us Part II. Games and Culture, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/155...

You're up. Maybe you can change my mind.

Because NG4 defended it doesn't mean NG4 is the gospel of gaming.

thorstein13d ago

Yeah Yui, it was "the game to hate" at the time. What was bizarre was the, as usual, journalists that were lying about the game and their stories were approved.

It was all clickhate all the time for the Order. I defended it too.

coolbeans12d ago

@Yui

-"I remember being only one of a few people on this site that actually praised The Order when it for came out and got alot of flack for it."

That could've been the case right at release, but you should see more recent opinion articles on here. There's a pretty substantial cadre who defend it on here as being "unfairly tarnished" that I simply don't see elsewhere.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 12d ago
Skuletor13d ago

Most of the backlash against The Last Of Us 2 was people upset that Joel was killed off, simple as that.

anast13d ago

There is that too, but the other groups pilled on too, which increased the numbers. I really don't see why we have to ignore everything but Joel being killed.

Inverno13d ago

I didn't like Part 2 and I'm not any of. The game sold like crazy, it's just hard for people to understand that most found the story to be arse.

anast13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

Prove what I say is wrong. I will need evidence. I didn't not say all. Your exception rule doesn't work. Find evidence that counters mine. So, we can have a real discussion.

Inverno13d ago

There are plenty of legitimate criticism in hours long analysis videos and reddit posts actually critiquing Part 2. The people you're talking about are such a minority, and they attack just about everything because they see the "wokeness" in the most subliminal ways. They're insignificant because the game still sold pretty well, and reviewed well regardless. Keep in mind the game released world wide, and western politics and views can't be applied to every corner of the world. I can agree that Days Gone was attacked, and unlike Part 2, due to these sites being so heavily political biased it did do some damage.

anast12d ago

I am at least showing the group was large enough of a concern for a journal to publish an article.

Where's your evidence?

Crows9012d ago

He's not looking for evidence. Don't bother with him.

Crows9012d ago

The last of us part 2 was bad story wise. Not some nonsense that you speak of...most of the negative people were random...lots of the critical reception from anything other than mainstream journalism thought that the game had huge problems.

Angry Joe and skill up being prime examples of that...unless of course like most socialists out there you wanna just lable people.

anast12d ago (Edited 12d ago )

Where's your evidence?

Crows9012d ago

@anast

Oh geez...Twitter is full of trolls...common sense.
The YouTube critics I mentioned are innocent till proven guilty. And proven with facts not opinions. I gave you evidence of 2 prominent youtubers and yet you ask for more...either you can't read or you aren't looking for evidence.

As far as groups being "large" for journos to get their panties all tied up...well then again you must be extremely gullible. As if we haven't seen thousands of articles claiming players are offended, angry or backlashing based solely on 1 or 2 posts. They love grabbing very specific individuals and using them to represent a much larger base....whatever is convenient to them making the case that gamers bad and journos good.

coolbeans12d ago (Edited 12d ago )

-"saying something is "cringe" doesn't prove me wrong. You just throw words out and hope they stick. Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise."

It doesn't "prove" it, but I have a solid success rate with the term - which seems to be the case here too. With regards to your article, I should break this down into parts:

1.) For starters, bleating for countering "evidence" after brandishing a media analysis paper (or papers) shouldn't be treated as some kind of trump card. That's not to say these researchers did nothing, mind you. Only that expecting counter-ideologies within this field who'll make this specific kind of work for TLOU Pt. II is absurdly demanding on its face. Nevermind the probability of non-progressive types getting the administrative approval being next to nil, but that's another can of worms.

2.) While I have critiques about x or y (some anecdotes being more flimsy than others, GG speculation, etc.), let's say for this argument that it's a solid piece overall. Having read the whole thing, there is literally *NOTHING* that validates the broad brush with which you painted TLOU2 critics in your first comment (speaking as someone who thinks it's a good game). The discussion about alt-fans, anti-fans, etc. does paint an ugly picture about the TLOU subreddit, Twitter users, certain YouTubers, and more; however, there's no positive declaration about TLOU2's critics ending at these particular clusters either. Even if you say "most, not all" in your first comment, that still seems overly broad compared to the text I read. (EDIT: That's not to disregard the nastiness or modest size in its own right.)

It's also worth noting how much of that paper's material is inspecting a pre-/at-release sort of backlash. But the game's been out for several years now. More and more people who AREN'T incels, homophobes, closet Nazis have played it past 2020 and you don't really see this new broad consensus about its accomplishments; in fact, you see more of a continued split over whether or not it deserves such monumental praise. Here's just a few other sub-communities near its release that don't fit your description:

- https://www.youtube.com/wat...
- https://www.youtube.com/wat...
- https://www.youtube.com/wat...

-"Because NG4 defended it doesn't mean NG4 is the gospel of gaming."

Correct, but you're just solidifying my point. Even PS fans elsewhere (social media or gaming forums) don't go to bat for The Order with the enthusiasm and consistency they do here in my experience. That's what makes your assessment of "anti-Sony Xbox fans" so fascinating to me.

anast12d ago

1) Speculation and emotion

2) Speculation and emotion

2a) Might be an argument if you gave me something other than your own opinion and emotions over the subject, but it's left as an anecdote without any real research. By the way, we can't negate the at release behavior, because it fits your narrative. It existed and those groups were involved.

The article is not a trump card and the fact that you seem to think so is more troubling on your end than mine. The article was to see if you could find other people that researched this phenomenon and we can have a conversation, but you still refuse to do this. Instead you wrote a sermon, which is a shame because maybe you had something with point "2a: It's also worth..." But this point still tries to side step actual events.

The final point doesn't solidify anything unless you are trying to solidify your own opinion. Albeit, it is passive aggressive, which is strange.

coolbeans11d ago

-"Speculation and emotion"

I mean... okay? Where am I wrong on 2.) though? Asking for a conflicting media studies research paper on this specific topic is already a random ask, given the environment with which these are made.

-"Might be an argument if you gave me something other than your own opinion and emotions over the subject, but it's left as an anecdote without any real research."

Wait. Just so we're clear: a research paper that focuses most of its attention towards a subreddit and social media comments to Neil Druckmann means you get to sustain your overly broad claims while contrary social media sources that don't exhibit the same kind of "alt-fan/anti-fan" rhetoric can't be counted? Now I feel even more confident in my initial assessment b/c all you're after is just whatever can be found with some accreditation behind it - regardless of quality.

-"By the way, we can't negate the at release behavior, because it fits your narrative. It existed and those groups were involved."

That's the thing: I never said they wasn't a sizable contingent of that either. From the start, my response was just how wild it was to paint *MOST* detractors with such a broad brush. I still don't think I'm off-base in saying it's cringe to just say "most people who shit on x game are closet Nazis or bigots of some sort," especially when your research doesn't really validate that.

-"The article is not a trump card and the fact that you seem to think so is more troubling on your end than mine."

Bro, you literally responded with "Bring some evidence to prove me otherwise.... You're up. Maybe you can change my mind." I don't really see how I'm speaking out of turn there given this and your original comment.

-"The article was to see if you could find other people that researched this phenomenon and we can have a conversation, but you still refuse to do this."

If no other people *HAVE* researched this phenomenon, then I don't see how the next best option is highly-popular sources which counter your original claim. Given that all you're promoting is a media studies paper hyper-focusing on a specific cluster of media, why wouldn't other forms of media work as some kind of substitute? That's not side-stepping events in the slightest.

-"The final point doesn't solidify anything unless you are trying to solidify your own opinion. Albeit, it is passive aggressive, which is strange."

I don't know what that first sentence means, honestly.

Look, I'll just put it like this: try to have a frank conversation about The Order on some other non-N4G gaming forum. There isn't going to be this clean split between 'Sony fans' and 'Xbox fans' that love it or hate it. Ask Sony fans how they'd feel about paying full-price for it and you're not going to get the ardent defenses compared to some of its most popular comment sections here.

anast11d ago

Still no evidence. I ask for you to bring contrary evidence, so maybe I might change my mind, all research can be falsifiable. This is what you are missing. We are thinking in two different universes.

You are writing sermons, which is a waste of everyone's time including yours. Bring some research and we will discuss it. As of now you have only brought superstitions.

coolbeans11d ago

-"I ask for you to bring contrary evidence, so maybe I might change my mind, all research can be falsifiable."

But I literally read YOUR evidence and it doesn't support the broader claims you made at the start. I'm not sure where else to go with that.

-"Bring some research and we will discuss it. As of now you have only brought superstitions."

Bro, leveraging this kind of language is so wild in the face of what you've provided. It's like unless those different communities I linked where fused together in a random media studies paper, you'd magically consider it valid. I don't understand how you're leveraging that, especially when it doesn't fortify your initial claim. You're basically retorting to me writing too much, regardless of the content itself. Just the oddest conversation with you thus far and I don't quite get it.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 11d ago
D0nkeyBoi13d ago

Amazing gameplay, but TLOU2 had one of the worst, most convoluted and uneccessary plots I ever seen in a sequel. Terrible story and the characters were forgettable. I didn't give an F about anyone in the story.

Inverno13d ago

I don't think any of these divided fans, other than LoU2. The rest were either victims of biased reviews or just generally agreed that they weren't as good as they could've been or just overall disappointing.

160°

Batman: Arkham Knight Still Runs Poorly On Switch Despite Massive Update

Batman: Arkham Knight wasn't in the best shape when it swooped onto Switch at the end of last year. Fortunately, the game has today received a monster 16GB update, one that's guaranteed to fix all of its problems, right? Well...

Read Full Story >>
nintendolife.com
CrimsonWing6957d ago

I dunno, the game runs fine on PS4 and PS5… I think this might be a Switch thing.

_SilverHawk_57d ago (Edited 57d ago )

Batman arkham knight shouldn't be on the switch as well as many other titles on the ps4 and xbox one because the switch will have the worst version that always perform poorly

The switch 2 will have the same dilemma as the later years of the switches life cycle because any AAA multiplatform games on switch 2 will most likely be the worst version to own because that game will be available elsewhere with way better performance and visuals.

The switch gained quite a bit of success because it was the only portable console available to play a lot of AAA multiplatform games but today there are many alternative handheld consoles that are better than the switch 2. Nintendo will be Nintendo so hoping for the latest cutting edge technologies to be in the switch 2 isn't being realistic while knowing Nintendo likes to make quite a bit of profit on sales of their hardware

Knightofelemia57d ago

Because the game was built to run on the PS4 and the PS5 won't have issues because it plays PS4 games. It is a Switch thing this game is asking a lot out of the little hybrid hand held system.

_SilverHawk_57d ago

When it comes to Nintendos gaming systems people need to stop making excuses for games running poorly on it because the switch was made 4 years after the ps4 and xbox one. It doesn't matter that the switch is a handheld console that can also be docked to play on a television.

There are so many games I played on the switch where the performance is very poor dropping the frames per second into the teens constantly but reviewers and a lot of gamers excuse the issues as it's a weak Nintendo handheld.

I can already see that a lot of people will be making excuses for issues when it comes to the switch 2 when they need to be highlighted like games on other gaming platforms. These gaming companies have years to research and develop the necessary components to make gaming consoles and Nintendo shouldn't get a pass for making shoddy hardware.

Amplitude56d ago (Edited 56d ago )

Silverhawk: "the switch was made 4 years after the ps4 and xbox one. It doesn't matter that the switch is a handheld"

What? Yes it does. How do you have more agrees than disagrees? You expected a small inexpensive 2017 Tegra in a Nintendo handheld console with a heavy focus on battery life to be as powerful as a PS4 home console that's powered by a wall and plugged into a large TV? No offence man but that's psychotic. I doubt even the Switch 2 will be running anything close to God of War Ragnarok. The Steam Deck can come quite close in some aspects but jeeze. You're talking about a budget 2017 handheld lol seeing it run Arkham Knight at all is an insane feat. Probably shouldn't have even been attempted in the first place but it's at least kind of cool that it's possible

DLSS and potentially VRR could be a huge game changer for Switch 2 but power constraints in a handheld are a very real thing. Even in 2025 you're not gonna get what you're looking for in a handheld unless you go the expensive handheld PC route and suffer through brutal battery life. Certainly not from Nintendo lol that's not their thing.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 56d ago
Sgt_Slaughter57d ago

Another rushed port job, it's disappointing to see better looking games run/perform better than a game from 2015

Terry_B57d ago

To be honest. Batman Arkham Knight looked a lot better in 2015 than almost every..if not exactly every game released for the Nintendo Switch since 2017.

It needed a big downgrade like The Witcher 3 or Mortal Kombat 11, 1 to run well on this weak hardware.

Neonridr57d ago

if The Witcher 3 can run on this thing at a respectable framerate, there is zero excuse for other games.

But that's because the dev took their time and optimized it properly. It wasn't a rush job like so many 3rd party games.

Terry_B57d ago

@neoridr ..look how Witcher 3 looks in comparison to other versions. (Pretty much like a last gen version of it..but yes it runs well at least)

While Batman AK on Switch looks more like the PS4 /XB Versions but runs worse of course.

As said..it needed a big visual downgrade and did not receive it.Porting it to the Switch was a damn dumb idea anyway.

Knightofelemia57d ago

Dummying down a game that is meant to run on XB1 and PS4 is going to be challenging to run on a system that is probably as powerful as a PS3. I give them a congrats for bringing it to the Switch and I hope this challenge pays off for them. As for me grabbing Arkham Knight on the Switch I am good I have the PS4 version.

Phoenix7657d ago

Batman: Arkham Knight Still Runs Poorly On Switch Despite Massive Update........ But is still a better game than suicide squad *fixed the title*

Show all comments (16)