Batman's PC version is a disaster, but how does console version look like without Day 1 Patch

Today's Batman: Arkham Knight premiere should nit be treated like a success. PC verison turned out to be a disaster, but knowing that let's check how console version of this game looks like, without Day 1 Patch installed.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
DrRobotnik997d ago

They only had 12 out sourced people working on the PC port. If that doesn't scream "don't care", I don't know what does. Also hearing the phrase "PC port" is still weird to me. Remember when everything was ported from PC? Not any more I guess.

SteamPowered997d ago

Considering all console games are built on Pc, it does seem a little odd that you would port a game back onto Pc.
Im not a Programmer, but you would think it would be easier getting a port to Pc than to console.

Serg997d ago

Making something USING a PC is vastly different than making something FOR a PC. Do you think people made millions of mobile apps on their phones? No, they are written on the PC and compiled/cross-compiled on the PC using a special compiler or emulator or on the target device itself. The code being written does not automatically run on PC just because it was written on it.

Kind of like a boat is not being constructed on water, but can't function outside of it.

TheUndertaker85997d ago (Edited 997d ago )

@Serg: Not trying to be that guy but... Larger ships do tend to be finished over water. The Titanic is a perfect example.

The parts for the ship were partially constructed inland then shipped to the departing docks. From there the ship was pieced together, the dry dock gets completely filled, and you have a floating boat.

Your overall point is very spot on though.

SteamPowered997d ago

@ Serg,

You completely missed my point. Lets not muddy the waters with cell phone architecture...

You are echoing exactly what I was saying about console games being made On Pc, but made For consoles.

I dont expect them to flick a switch on a console game an BOOM! The game works perfect.

Buuuut, you would have to think a Pc port would be easier to handle than a console port.

Utalkin2me997d ago


Yeah but the main components of any boat has to be on the water when constructing. Such as setting the engines and stuff. And majority of your larger vessels are constructed on water itself. You don't construct the whole thing then decide to put it in the water, you would wind up with alot of headaches and problems. Just the same as game developing.

porkChop997d ago

It wouldn't be easier. The games are specifically programmed from the ground up for the console's architecture, and is pretty much coded "to the metal" for the best possible optimization. To make a PC port you have to undo ALL of that optimization because that console hardware isn't available on PC, and then proceed to re-optimize the game for thousands of different PC configurations. It's much more difficult.

Serg997d ago

Guys, did you get the point of the analogy or not? What's the point of trying to be a smartass about an analogy? The sole purpose of an analogy is to provide a similar situation that makes the subject you are trying to explain easier to understand.


Mobile was an example that you don't build an app on the platform it is intended for, it has nothing to do with architecture. Anyone trying to develop an app on the phone would be carried howling to the nuthouse within a month, after trying to type thousands of lines of code on a touch keyboard.

And you said "[..]port back onto Pc.[..]". Implying that it actually ran on it in the first place. So no, I didn't echo exactly what you were saying.

Nerdmaster997d ago

I also like to use analogies, but the truth is: people don't understand analogies and will always say "it isn't the EXACT same thing, so you're wrong".

People aren't very bright, so you will end up having to argue not only about the topic in question, but also why the analogy you gave fits the topic. God only knows how many times the same happened to me here on N4G.

By the way, I agree with your analogy.

uth11997d ago (Edited 997d ago )

They are built on dev-kits on PC, so they still need to be ported to PC native.

And console ports are easier. There's one set of hardware to test.

For QA'ing a PC port, you would need to test it on various GPUs, CPUs, and memory configurations. It's impossible to test everything though.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 997d ago
Utalkin2me997d ago

I just seen a interview with the developer, explaining everything.

Poroz996d ago

Rofl. I could not help but laugh my butt off at that video.

BeefCurtains996d ago (Edited 996d ago )

OH MY GAD!!! Everyone has to click on that video. I'm crying laughing so hard.!!!


You gotta BUBS UP FUNNY for posting that video link!!!

Viper7997d ago (Edited 997d ago )

So what makes you think 12 people was not enough for the port? What makes you think more would make it any better?

More people working on project or part of the project isn't necessarily better nor does it directly translate to stuff getting done faster. Lower headcount means easier management and generally the team is more agile.

I would blame this more on the Q.A department or the publishers for releasing the game before it was ready.

Imalwaysright997d ago

Those 12 people probably weren't enough to port the game in time to meet the release date set by the publisher. Either way you're right. If there is someone to blame are the higher ups at WB.

OrangePowerz997d ago

Why would you blame the QA department on that? Sure they told them that the game doesn't work very well.

Magicite997d ago

Not disaster, but cataclysmic catastrophe.

3-4-5997d ago

* Just because they are the ones doing it, does not mean they are that great at it.

Only so many people know how to develop games, and not all of them are good.

This team of 12, was obviously in over there head, they didn't have the talent or ability to make it happen.

I'm sure they tried as hard as any 12 people could have though and I respect them for that, but it sounds like the situation was doomed to failure from the beginning.

Smells of a corporate money decision by somebody who doesn't understand or care about quality management.

Godmars290997d ago

Everything being made on a PC, a customized workstation to make console games, is not the same as a PC port.

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 996d ago
iTechHeads997d ago

I love the PC Verizon. Although the T-Mobile version is fine too.

Mr Logic997d ago

probably a typo somewhere saying Verizon instead of version

iTechHeads997d ago

There was a typo in the title, which has been stealthily fixed.

playstation4epic997d ago (Edited 997d ago )

Yh they should fix that typo

uth11997d ago

This is why you don't reply using voice recognition :)

ryuuzakibjorn997d ago

What I don't understand is this is made on Unreal Engine 3. Heavily modified, yes. But it's still Unreal Engine 3. Can't they just switch out the OnlineSubsystem stuff from PSN/XBL and point it to Steam?

Surely they wouldn't have been stupid enough to OVERWRITE the base renderer code of Unreal Engine to focus on either Playstation / Xbox. Normally people will make code to "Plug-in" to the existing code instead of overwriting it.

In that case; It would just be a case of File > Build > Windows (x86) - Done.

I honestly don't understand why they had to send it over to an outside team of 12 people (Which doesn't sound like much but remember, all the assets and main code was already created and implemented) - It's rather confusing.

TheUndertaker85997d ago

So what you're saying is consoles should get the straight up port with no real alterations for the system based on the fact the engine is supposed to cater to PC...

Sound logic indeed. Why wouldn't they be coding specifically for PS4 or Xbox One? Are you really condoning the cut and paste treatment?

ryuuzakibjorn997d ago (Edited 997d ago )

No, No. Not at all!

What I'm saying is the base engine is made so that you can build to PC with the click of a button. Other consoles require extra code but that code sits ON TOP of the existing code. This code has nothing to do with the game and is called "Engine-level code" as it affects the engine and nothing more.

Actually, the code in question affects the "BuildTarget" - But as I said, It sits on top of the existing build target code (And doesn't replace it).

That's how it should be anyway. It sounds like they overwrite the original PC building code on the engine or some other such nonesense.

I don't understand why I'm getting dislikes for it; It's the facts. I've been a developer for just under 10 years and that's how things are with Unreal Engine - The build tools are seperate to the main engine.

Even if they had overwritten the PC build target code; It would just be a case of using an alternative build of Unreal Engine that HAD the PC Build target it and frankensteining the code together and building.

It's a process that should literally take minutes (The building would take a while though) hence why I am saying what I'm saying.

I'm not being a fanboy to any console or whatever or anything like that; I am literally just stating the facts about what Unreal Engine does on the engine level; Hence why I don't understand why it took 12 people and even then they managed to mess things up.

This is literally JUST the facts with no bias in it; But as always with N4G - Everything is your opinion and because everyone thinks you're a freakin' liar or something - It'll get "Disagreed" to poop. *Sigh*

I was only trying to shed some light on the situation from a developer point of view.

The reason I said: "Surely they wouldn't have been stupid enough to OVERWRITE the base renderer code of Unreal Engine to focus on either Playstation / Xbox" is because the code should sit on-top of each other; Not replace it. Otherwise you'd have a scenario where you'd have to have two seperate engines completely: One for Playstation and one for Xbox.

Most developers with common sense have one engine with multiple build targets (Duplicating existing build targets and editing them to their needs) but it sounds like here they only had two build targets (Xbox, PS4) which makes ZERO sense when Unreal Engine 3 COMES with a PC build target as default.

TL;DR - There's no excuse for this crappy port; I try to explain why but people think I'm a freakin' fanboy or something *Sigh*

As I said, Only trying to help shed some light on this stuff.

TheUndertaker85997d ago (Edited 997d ago )

"Actually, the code in question affects the "BuildTarget" - But as I said, It sits on top of the existing build target code (And doesn't replace it)." Not a developer or anything but what you're talking about is exactly that; Taking code from PC, hoping to throw a little something something on there, then calling it the console version.

Again though that would mean you would be building for PC, targeting PC requirements, then doing the bare minimum to get it onto console.

You're literally flipping the scenario and calling it good that way but bad this way.

So I ask again. Why should they not be optimizing and working to get the best product possible to each platform and instead pushing PC and treating the others as an afterthought?

Not condoning what they did at all as the PC product isn't up to standards but to even insinuate a good majority should get shafted and should have a worse experience so yours can be better is just stupid. Then we really aren't talking about fixing the PC version but ways to hinder the console versions in favor of a charade.

Stories like this go to prove the point. We aren't talking about the fact that the PC version needs fixing. We're talking about hindering the console version to deliver the idea that the PC version is superior.

ps4fanboy997d ago

Buy a ps4 guys , bow to the baphomet and have it done with...lmao.

Show all comments (41)
The story is too old to be commented.